Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55162 of 2019 Applicant :- Sohan Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Usha Srivastava,Shailesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 204 of 2019 under Sections 147, 149, 323, 302, 324, 504 of IPC, Police Station - Saraikhwaja, District Jaunpur with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The report of this incident was lodged by the complainant against accused Vikas son of Tansen, Vivek son of Ram Murat, Ajay son of Gudar, Jogendra son of Bharat and unknown person on the allegation that on 30.05.2019 complainant's uncle Dashrath son of Bhola and Ram Ashish son of Dayaram went to purchase Ration from the fair price shop at about 2:00 P.M., the aforesaid accused persons assaulted Dasrath and Ram Ashish with sword and Gadasi. Both Dasrath and Ram Ashish sustained grievous injuries and in hospital Dasrath succumbed to injuries.
The learned counsel for applicant submits that the present accused was not named in the First Information Report. His name has surfaced during investigation in the statement of injured Ram Ashish after nine days of the incident. He further submits that co-accused Jogendra Umar, Vikas, Rahul Chauhan who were assigned similar role as was assigned to the present accused, have already been granted bail by another Benches of this Court, copies of their bail orders are annexed collectively as Annexure - 7 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. Name of present accused Sohan Chauhan as well as Rahul Chauhan has surfaced during the investigation and Rahul Chauhan has already been granted bail. Learned counsel submits that on the ground of parity with other co-accused, the present applicant also deserves bail. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 01.09.2019, if released, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for complainant Suneel Kumar Tiwari have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. But they have not disputed that this accused was not named in the FIR and his name has surfaced after 9 days of the incident and co-accused Rahul Chauhan who name also surfaced during the investigation has already been granted bail. They could not dispute the factum of bail parity of the applicant with co-accused Rahul Chauhan being claimed by the learned counsel for applicant.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let applicant Sohan Chauhan involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:
(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law;
(2). The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;
(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(4). The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 16.12.2019 LBY